Re: Citrix client fails under OS 9.2.2 - 01/22/0201:30 AM

Re: Citrix client fails under OS 9.2.2 - 01/22/0202:36 PM

Link in original post no longer works unless you're signed up for MacFixIt Pro apparently.<br><br>I haven't signed up BTW because of the terms of agreement. I suggest you read the terms of agreement before signing up for any of the Tech Tracker services. There's a real "gotcha" in the one I read.<br><br>(My original post was an FYI post in the event others were having related problems.)<br><br>Ted Landau has promised to check it out and get back to me, but that doesn't mean I'll remember to post it hear. The catch: Tech Tracker proposes to do a scan of your hard drive for blah blah purposes (and I quite frankly don't care what they are or the details).....not on one of my hard drives they're not.<br><br>RE: The response to my post. Trashing the prefs is always a good idea, but the problem I referred to is more complex and the discussion is located in the MacFixIt article which, being in the data base, is now only accessible by MacFixIt Pro members.<br><br>Thanks for your contribution, however. We're always glad to have other users trying to help out others in this forum.<br><br><br>128k_Mac<br><br>The box said "Requires Microsoft Windows or better" so I bought a Macintosh.

Re: Citrix client fails under OS 9.2.2 - 01/24/0208:36 AM

I just read the explanation about the terms of use at MacFixIt. Here it is:<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Q. What about the license agreement where it talks about "scanning" your drive? A. This is only relevant to TechTracker Pro, not MacFixIt Pro. The agreement wording will be fixed.<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>Don't know if that makes a difference for you or not, but thought you'd like to see it.<br><br>And that's true too.--Shakespeare, King Lear

Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Citrix client fails under OS 9.2.2 - 01/24/0212:49 PM

Thanks.<br><br>I also noticed the comments posted today but the only statement was to the effect that the agreement terms would be modified, specific to MacFixIt Pro (not the other options; anyone signing up for them, having their hard drive scanned, is a fool IMHO), but there's no statement the agreement has been "fixed" (as yet).<br><br>Since you aren't enlightened as to what the agreement is until the very end of the process, which is incorrect as it should be at the very beginning, the only sensible location and is where normally found, I haven't checked again.<br><br>I've corresponded with Ted Landau, probably three emails, on issue and haven't heard from him today. I've gone through the "sign up" process three times, entering the info and credit card, et al, a bit tiresome, and haven't tried it again today.<br><br>I also lodged my complaint with him earlier about when the agreement pops up. I further made one last complaint, merely an opinion, that the whole process should be voluntary. That issue can be debated either way and it's not my place to make a final call on it.<br><br>My point is that I voluntarily contribute, at least in my mind, regardless of any "benefits," to all the sites I use for some purpose, which make a request, with Ars Tech, FreeBSD, MacOS X Hints, f*ckmicrosoft.com (love that URL and free email address!) being examples that come to mind, and would do so willingly with MacFixIt if is a practical necessity.<br><br>In view of the fact that I have not contributed, for example, I've discontinued my limited use of lowendmac.com.<br><br>Times have changed. Maintaining sites like MacFixIt and MacInTouch which were one man shows in the beginning, have become vastly more labor intensive. The fact that MacFixIt is not run entirely by volunteers, as are the others, makes no different to me.<br><br>I've likely mentioned before that one of the "Top 100" Mac sites, at least according to SiteLink, was a project to which I contributed until burn out set in. My friend no longer updates it either and we're both somewhat amused that it still attracts so many hits.<br><br>But this leads us to the argument of what to do with the especially high traffic and useful sites which are specific as to topic when the banner advertising model fails. The next logical progression to me is voluntary contributions, a model which, among the computer specific sites with which I'm familiar was pioneered by Ars Tech, followed quickly by lowendmac.com.<br><br>If that fails? Then go to a model where the content driven site requires payment to access to all or part, with the "part" another possible interim step.<br><br>I would like for the Internet to be "free," especially for the benefit of introducing beginners to the better sites or for classes like students who can't afford the toll. ("Afford" is a word not easily defined.)<br><br>But the Internet hasn't been "free" for some time. I dislike the prospects, to only pick an example, of a site like MacOS X Hints which requires more hours daily than the average user can imagine. There were days when my friend, for example, would spend an hour or two just answering email from newbies or those to lazy to track down info for themselves (or pose questions on the various forums like this one). That inevitably leads to one thing: burn out.<br><br>Anyone who's been using the net since 1995-1997 period will recall a number of good sites which have vanished. Their owners didn't lose interest, they simply were worn out. Unless someone actually has to do day to day maintenance on a high traffic site, they don't have a clue how much time (much of it boring, detal work) is required to keep it up, not to mention the repeated "my printer won't print" questions.<br><br>The tone of my post should not be interpreted as jaded or negative. I've been there and done that. It's a practical reality.<br><br>When was it that the free lunch disappeared? <br><br>I've wandered deliberately this time because expressing myself on this topic is a favorite one of mine. The viability and usefulness of the Internet can only continue, and continue to grow with good content, if we change with the times where warranted.<br><br>Fairly common in the forums with less than those at MacFixIt, for example, would be what often occurs on MacMinute Forum. It's a poor second best or tends to be a last gasp measure. The poster runs around the net and posts a problem on four or five forums, especially those which have the email reply option. I've seen them, same post, often the same user name, until (and if) they get an answer.<br><br>Too often their first post, wherever, provides inadequate information to elicit the correct answer. The logical method used by most who respond is then to ask the obvious additional questions for more information.<br><br>(Not me. I take the shotgun approach and if I can come up with six guesses, so be it. I do this partly because I think the variety of potential "answers" provided are sometimes needed, but also because they provide a bit of an education to lurkers. As a lurker that's the "answer" I prefer. I learn things about the OS and possible solutions for similar problems which may arise in the future. Also, the one answer solutions are too often not as common as we'd like them to be.)<br><br>(I don't need to explain this to yoyo52 who has, too often, been victimized by my shotgun approach.) <br><br>What was the topic?<br><br>Oh, we were off topic to begin with? <br><br>I plan to check out MacFixIt again in a few days. I shall be a bit irritated if I have to type in all that info just to make what is to me a contribution, not a subscription, only to find that agreement at the end.<br><br>And the "benefits" (a questionable idea, regardless of purpose) of having my hard drive scanned so that Version Tracker can provide me with updates in some timely fashion has no interest for me. That is the Microsoft model, the plans for things to be, already found in the mandatory registration for WinXP OS (Skip the process? Sure, but the OS dies, along with your data, in 30 days.).<br><br>Given the opportunity everyone from Amazon.com to DoubleClick.net has abused (on one or more occasions) the access to privleged information and privacy of users. If nothing else your trusted and private information goes into a database someone has.<br><br>Do you wish to trust information of any kind to dear old Micro$loth? Each one of us now compromises too often our right to personal privacy, often providing information useless to a third party, or even if necessary information which can come back to haunt us for any number of reasons.<br><br>I received a spam today that I finally associated with a newsletter I subscribed to about 1997. That news source long since died an unnatural death and the assets, including their database, have been resold at least twice. Well, I now know who the new owner is. <br><br>Think twice before providing information to anyone, regardless of how legitimate the reason. Then minimize such decisions in their number, i.e., do you really have to purchase computer components from memory to hard drives from eight sources solely for the purpose of saving a few bucks? Is the real cost worth it?<br><br>We have not solved, nor will we in the foreseeable future, the problems related to privacy. I've purchased merchandise on the net from at least two sites that have been hacked and personal and credit card information, et al, have been compromised. In each case I had to waste time and effort to insure no problems would result simply from the credit card end alone.<br><br>Read a few stories about identity theft, too often based on readily available information on the internet, toss in the possible breach of secure information, whether via hackers or a webmaster who is (becomes) dishonest for some reason, etc. etc.<br><br>Is there a bottom line to this post?<br><br>Nope. <br><br>Wait!!<br><br>Don't click on agreeing to joining MacFixIt Pro until/if you read the membership/license agreement.<br><br>And I hope everyone who finds MacFixIt will join me in "subscribing" when/if that agreement is changed. <br><br>Rant within a rant within a rant within a rant......<br><br>Ends.<br><br>What's my grade, professor? <br><br>I didn't write this way would I took Freshman Comp. Knew better. <br><br><br><br>128k_Mac<br><br>The box said "Requires Microsoft Windows or better" so I bought a Macintosh.

Re: Citrix client fails under OS 9.2.2 - 01/24/0204:27 PM

I'm looking forward :rolleyes: to over 1,200 pages of crisp freshman prose this semester. Thought you'd like to know <br><br>[edit: I do know how much work it takes to keep up a site for students--the largest class I've done is of 32 kids, and that was hell on wheels. So I can imagine that a public site must be overwhelming to run. I don't begrudge paying at all!]<br><br>And that's true too.--Shakespeare, King Lear<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by yoyo52 on 01/24/02 07:33 PM (server time).</EM></FONT></P>

Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Citrix client fails under OS 9.2.2 - 01/24/0206:43 PM

You're limiting me to only 1200 pages this semester?<br><br>I'd thought I could easily do 2000 pages here on MacMinute Forum between now and the end of May. <br><br><br><br>128k_Mac<br><br>The box said "Requires Microsoft Windows or better" so I bought a Macintosh.

Re: Citrix client fails under OS 9.2.2 - 01/24/0208:08 PM

I wasn't counting reading your stuff--that's unadulterated pleasure. Usually.<br><br>The "usually" is there for the same reason that "mileage may vary" is in one of yours <br><br>And that's true too.--Shakespeare, King Lear

Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Citrix client fails under OS 9.2.2 - 01/24/0208:43 PM

Hmmm.<br><br>I'll try to see if I can work in something that's adulterated from time to time.<br><br>As long as you don't correct my grammar. I've never thought of using the grammar checker in Word. (except for fun....next to ResEdit it's one of my favorite Mac games) <br><br>But for some dumb reason I bought Grammarian X from C&G. I've even updated it. In the 2 or 3 months I've had it I've (obviously) never launched it.<br><br><br><br>The edit: the usual typos and spelling errors some additional content of no value.<br><br>128k_Mac<br><br>The box said "Requires Microsoft Windows or better" so I bought a Macintosh.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by 128K_Mac on 01/24/02 11:46 PM (server time).</EM></FONT></P>

Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Citrix client fails under OS 9.2.2 - 01/24/0208:55 PM

Hmm.....talking to myself again.<br><br>This thread started with a reference to "my business."<br><br>I noticed I have an interesting profile. It says I'm a semi-retired ceo and old fool. Only the second part of the description is correct. <br><br>I became "semi-retired" about 11 years ago. Since 911 I've been more like (finally) fully retired, although for reasons not of my choosing, best left undiscussed.<br><br>At least the second part of my "occupation" is listed correctly. <br><br>A better signature file for me:<br><br>"Men say they know many things; but lo! they have taken wings--The arts and sciences, and a thousand appliances; The wind that blows is all that any body knows." Henry David Thoreau<br><br>128k_Mac<br><br>The box said "Requires Microsoft Windows or better" so I bought a Macintosh.

Re: Citrix client fails under OS 9.2.2 - 02/09/0204:05 AM

trouble is you say too much for my small head<br>and I am not bothering to read the article because <br>a) they probably wont let me look at anything .. they never let me post anything and I just don't care for Mac Fixit at all. Never have so why I pay now? <br>b) it doesn't concern me, since I don't run windows or citrix and I'd rather just play with ResEdit than do business<br>but <br>if you have a problem along those lines you should chat with my son.<br>He seems to know about these things <br><br><br><br>=============================================================<br>| "Behold the Turtle, he maketh no progress ==== until he sticketh out his neck." |<br>=============================================================